I have always been attracted to Stephen King's stories (and some of the films based on them), but why? On one level King is a genius at creating a literary space of the dark sublime--that is, he composes his narratives in such a way so as to heighten the tension in the plot to its most extreme point or zenith. But then, just as the story reaches for its climax everything turns a 180 and the remainder of the story simply falls into place.
It is this logical unfolding of the plot that makes the story worth your time. But if you notice this attribute in King's pen stroke may in fact be his Achilles' Heel. Why? Because, I think, nearly all of his stories unfold in such logical terms--in terms so perfect that it becomes deeply disturbing if only because they are so clean and, well, perfect. It is this perfect distribution of justice that puts King well within the genre of the fantasmic (fantasy). King is a perfect ideological writer on this score because he's creates his narratives in the perfect four-fold fashion. First, we encounter a middle-class "normal" man/woman with whom we (the reader/viewer) are able to easily relate. Then, the twist happens in King's second movement--a tragic event confronts our innocent character. Moreover, this tragic event creates a series of further events which increase and heighten the original tragic moment until finally...the third stage is ripe: enter the dragon, that is, "the 180" (i.e., the reversal). The forth and final stage happens in nearly mathematical form. What you have here is a simple deduction that in one way or another rights the wrongs.
There is a theological doctrine for this logical movement that "rights the wrongs" called Atonement. King's entire plot, at least in the Shawshank Redemption is obsessed with Atoning --setting the record straight. Yet there are many records that need straightened, but King's "record" is nothing short of "cosmic"; King wants to set the entire world back on the straight record--which said differently is called Justice. The mechanism he employs for achieving cosmic "Justice" follows the Biblical injunction: "what you sow you shall reap". In other words the antagonists in King's stories really do get what they deserve--and they get what they deserve in terms that perfectly correspond to the unjust acts committed against the protagonist. It is this exacting manner of atoning the world back together again that makes the novel/film so satisfying to read/view. And it is this "satisfaction" that clues us into why King's works are so ironic and thus ideological. For this rigid view of "Justice" being served in the narrative simply reproduces a blindness to actually existing unjust actions that happen in the world on a deeper and certainly less mathematical level. In this way, King un-trains the reader/viewer to see views of cosmic atonement in ways that fail to conform to easily discernible corresponding actions that will "set the world back on its just and true course." The underlining problem with King’s theology of Atonement is that it comes over as cliché and analytically perfect and thus insulting to the reader/viewer. It is insulting because it underestimates the intelligence of the reader/viewer by assuming that the world does in fact operate in these perfect terms. So the upshot of King's work is that the reader/viewer is satisfied and insulted at the same time. In this way, King delivers his package to us that gives us a great feeling of pleasure and yet totally cuts us down. Thanks you Mr. King for gracing us with such a gift as this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting, I slightly disagree. I believe that it is the idealogical cosmic justice that leaves us satisfied. It is the lack of judgement and justice that infuriates the viewer as the protagonist is mistreated, and it is the 180 that fulfills our need for justice. One can not exist without the other. For example if the movie had ended with the suicide of the protagonist, would it still have been a great movie? It is arguable, but it certainly would not have achieved the success that it enjoys, because the basic need for atonement and justice is one that the masses identify with and they yearn to see it exemplified as it is in Shawshank Redemption. Cosmic justice is a basic emotional need that is only insulting if satired.
Interesting, I slightly disagree. I believe that it is the idealogical cosmic justice that leaves us satisfied. It is the lack of judgement and justice that infuriates the viewer as the protagonist is mistreated, and it is the 180 that fulfills our need for justice. One can not exist without the other. For example if the movie had ended with the suicide of the protagonist, would it still have been a great movie? It is arguable, but it certainly would not have achieved the success that it enjoys, because the basic need for atonement and justice is one that the masses identify with and they yearn to see it exemplified as it is in Shawshank Redemption. Cosmic justice is a basic emotional need that is only insulting if satired.
Post a Comment